• Hughes Next Start TBA?

    Posted by on April 30th, 2008 · Comments (10)

    Via Tyler Kepner

    The Yankees appear to be on the verge of removing the struggling Phil Hughes from the starting rotation.

    Hughes was not on the field with the rest of the team during batting practice and was not available for comment before the game. It is not known if Hughes would be optioned to Scranton or placed on the disabled list with an injury not believed to be related to his pitching arm.

    When asked after batting practice if Hughes was healthy, Manager Joe Girardi said he was. General Manager Brian Cashman said he could not comment on Hughes’s health status, but he said Hughes’s immediate future was being discussed.

    I was doing a bit of driving this afternoon – between the hours of 4 pm ET and 6:30 pm ET. While in the car, I was flipping back and forth between Michael Kay on ESPN Radio and Mike & The Mad Dog on WFAN.

    On both shows, they were really picking on Joe Girardi and Brian Cashman for making statements today of “Hughes is still a member of the starting rotation” while not answering the question of “Will Hughes make his next start?” Both shows, and all three hosts, concurred that Girardi and Cashman not stating, yes or no, that Hughes would make his next start meant Hughes was going to be replaced.

    Michael Kay, between 4:30 pm and 5 pm, was especially tough on Hughes. Kay was saying things like:

    ‘I don’t understand how someone can be considered the best pitching prospect in baseball when they throw a 91 MPH fastball that’s as straight as an arrow.’


    ‘Last year people said were weren’t seeing the real Phil Hughes because of his injury. And, he’s not hurt now and we’re still seeing the same unimpressive stuff.”

    But, Kay really got me when he said something along the lines of:

    ‘The Yankees people say that Hughes is an ace in the making. I want to believe them, but, players that I’ve talked to have told me that Hughes, at best, will be a forth or a fifth starter.’

    Man, when a Yankee Propaganda Puppet like Kay starts ripping on Hughes like this, you know the worm has turned on poor Phil Franchise.

    Comments on Hughes Next Start TBA?

    1. carlo
      April 30th, 2008 | 8:50 pm

      I have the greatest respect of media people… but the Yankees’ goal is to win games, not to please the media, part of the game is to keep decisions (like that of Hughes) among themselves until they have to really come out with it. It will be harder for other teams to prepare against the Yankees if they don’t know who’s pitching….

      These talkshow hostsdon’t have the right nor the reason to be angry at Girardi or Cash.

    2. bfriley76
      April 30th, 2008 | 9:49 pm

      Michael Kay said this? You mean the same Michael Kay that once said that Randy Johnson had a better 2006 than Mike Mussina because Randy won 17 games (while posting an ERA+ of 90) and Mussina won 15 (while posting an ERA+ of 129).

      Forgive me if I don’t accept his word as gospel when it comes to pitching ability.

    3. baileywalk
      April 30th, 2008 | 10:44 pm

      Michael Kay is an idiot — and a two-faced idiot at that. I don’t understand why the Yankees allow him to rip players on his show and keep his job as the announcer. Kay is a phony — end of story.

      The real question is how much hand lotion and tissues Steve has burned through as Hughes has been beaten bloody this last month.

    4. April 30th, 2008 | 10:58 pm

      Way not to go personal baileywalk. You talk about me, with Hughes, Cashman, etc. Yet, every other one of your comments is an attack at me.

      So, when things go the opposite of my predictions, how many tissues and bottles of lotion do you go through?

    5. baileywalk
      April 30th, 2008 | 11:58 pm

      Oh, my God, dude, the stock in the companies of my lotion and tissues of choice go through the roof. I can’t control myself. I’m so happy I can’t keep my hands out of my pants. It’s messy, but boy is it satisfying! Woooo-hooooo!

      Seriously, Steve, can’t you take a joke? I would never call you a liar, but if you told me you’re not enjoying Hughes’ struggles after all the insane back-and-forth you had with people on this site about him I’d call you a liar.

      I was just tweaking you, because this site has almost become devoted to Hughes. Sorry if you took it “personal.” I also reject the idea that everything I write is an attack on you. Even that post above was primarily about Michael Kay.

      You’re the one creating the posts. Things are leading from YOUR opinion. So since we never seem to agree about anything, I guess I can understand why you think I’m attacking you. But trust me, I’m just being my opinionated self and there’s never any offense meant.

      And again, sorry if the above joke irritated you. But masturbation jokes always make me laugh. But maybe I just have a very low sense of humor.

    6. Don
      May 1st, 2008 | 2:59 am


    7. MJ
      May 1st, 2008 | 9:40 am

      ….players that I’ve talked to have told me that Hughes, at best, will be a forth or a fifth starter.
      I just want to know who Michael Kay is talking to. Hughes’s teammates? Opponents? Former players who are now broadcasters?

      I’m not saying he’s right and I’m not saying he’s wrong, but I’d like to know who he’s talking about or if it’s just his own opinion which he then has to attribute to “people” so that it looks like he’s not being biased.

    8. May 1st, 2008 | 11:05 am

      baileywalk – you asking about me masturbating over Phil Hughes news is supposed to be a joke? Sorry, I’m not getting that one.

      In any event, you’re making the Phil Hughes story into a Steve Lombardi story. And, that’s why it’s crossing the personal line.

      That would be like me writing an entry on Hughes saying “baileywalk’s favorite eye-candy and lust puppet, Phil Hughes, pitched great today.”

      Would you like that? Would you see it as just a joke?

    9. baileywalk
      May 1st, 2008 | 12:08 pm

      Yeah, I would see that as a joke — and a funny one. I obviously have a big man-crush on Hughes. You think I don’t know that? I haven’t had a favorite player for the entire ’90s run till now, but I would have to consider Hughes just that. He’s the first prospect they’ve had that I was able to follow from the draft on and see in the minors and I’m way, way, waaaaay overprotective of him. This is not news to me.

      The reason why I would think “favorite eye-candy and lust-puppet” was a joke is because it’s just an exaggerated version of the truth. So I didn’t think you were rubbing one out to Hughes’ struggles, but if you tell me after all the shit we put your through over Hughes that you’re not, in some small way, smiling internally — well, dude, if that’s the truth, and you’re not, then you are not human. Any normal human being would have a least a small sense of “I told you so.”

      And masturbation is funny. C’mon. I guess we have no Howard Stern, “South Park,” etc., etc. fans around here. Maybe I’m the young one or something.

    10. May 1st, 2008 | 12:23 pm

      ~~~but if you tell me after all the shit we put your through over Hughes that you’re not, in some small way, smiling internally — well, dude, if that’s the truth, and you’re not, then you are not human.~~~

      You’ve never been right and unhappy about it?

      An example: You’re given a car and it’s a piece of crap. That’s your opinion. Everyone tells you that you’re nuts. You drive the car and it breaks down. The bill to fix it in $1,000.

      So, you were right and everyone else was wrong. But, are you happy? No, you’re upset because the car is a dud and now it’s money required.

      Same thing for me on Hughes. I’ve said what I’ve said about him because I believe it to be true. But, as a Yankees fan, seeing all this now, I’m not happy about it. I’d much rather have been wrong and seeing things go well.

      Like the car thing, if that were me, I’d rather do without the breakdown and the bill, be wrong, and be driving without the hassle.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.